This is an R Markdown document. Markdown is a simple formatting syntax for authoring HTML, PDF, and MS Word documents. For more details on using R Markdown see http://rmarkdown.rstudio.com.
When you click the Knit button a document will be generated that includes both content as well as the output of any embedded R code chunks within the document. You can embed an R code chunk like this:
library(readxl)
library(ggpubr)
## Loading required package: ggplot2
library(dplyr)
##
## Attaching package: 'dplyr'
## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
##
## filter, lag
## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
##
## intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
library(effectsize)
library(effsize)
Dataset6.1 <- read_excel("C:/Users/tanie/Downloads/Dataset6.1.xlsx")
Dataset6.1 %>%
group_by(Group) %>%
summarise(
Mean = mean(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
Median = median(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
SD = sd(Exam_Score, na.rm = TRUE),
N = n()
)
## # A tibble: 2 Ă— 5
## Group Mean Median SD N
## <chr> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <int>
## 1 No Tutoring 71.9 71.5 7.68 40
## 2 Tutoring 78.4 78.7 7.18 40
hist(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"],
main = "Histogram of Tutoring Scores",
xlab = "Value",
ylab = "Frequency",
col = "lightblue",
border = "black",
breaks = 10)
hist(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"],
main = "Histogram of No Tutoring Scores",
xlab = "Value",
ylab = "Frequency",
col = "lightgreen",
border = "black",
breaks = 10)
For the tutoring histogram, the data appears symetrically skewed. The
kurtosis appears bell-shaped (normal).
For the no tutoring histogram, the data appears symmetrical (normal). The kurtosis also appears bell-shaped (normal).
ggboxplot(Dataset6.1, x = "Group", y = "Exam_Score",
color = "Group",
palette = "jco",
add = "jitter")
The tutoring boxplot appears normal. There are dots past the
whiskers.
The no tutoring boxplot appears abnormal. There are several dots past the whiskers. Although some are very close to the whiskers, some are arguably far away.
shapiro.test(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"])
##
## Shapiro-Wilk normality test
##
## data: Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "No Tutoring"]
## W = 0.98791, p-value = 0.9398
shapiro.test(Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"])
##
## Shapiro-Wilk normality test
##
## data: Dataset6.1$Exam_Score[Dataset6.1$Group == "Tutoring"]
## W = 0.98859, p-value = 0.953
The data for tutoring was normal (p > .05). The data for no tutoring was normal (p > .05).
t.test(Exam_Score ~ Group, data = Dataset6.1, var.equal = TRUE)
##
## Two Sample t-test
##
## data: Exam_Score by Group
## t = -3.8593, df = 78, p-value = 0.000233
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means between group No Tutoring and group Tutoring is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
## -9.724543 -3.105845
## sample estimates:
## mean in group No Tutoring mean in group Tutoring
## 71.94627 78.36147
p < .05, (less than .05), this means the results are SIGNIFICANT.
cohens_d(Exam_Score ~ Group, data = Dataset6.1, pooled_sd = TRUE)
## Cohen's d | 95% CI
## --------------------------
## -0.86 | [-1.32, -0.40]
##
## - Estimated using pooled SD.
the effect size -0.86 meaning that there is a large difference between tutoring and not tutoring group. Tutoring (M = 78.40, SD = 7.18) were significantly different from Females (M = 71.9, SD = 7.68) in exam scores, t(78) = -3.85, p = .0002. The effect size was large (Cohen’s d = -0.86).